CEL is still very much alive! Just in quiet perseverance mode. work is slow and steady.


Here's a draft of a possible "mini book" idea that came about working on the much larger eBook. PLEASE TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! This mini book takes some rather bold "CEL policy claims," and we need your feedback.


ALSO some of you are quoted. Please let me know if you'd like to remain anonymous or have the quote entirely removed!

We need an editor!!! any volunteers?

Let me know what you like too!

EDIT: New version 0.86 is up regarding comments 2-9 & some PM's !!!

Im very excited for this! How will we be organizing the ideas? Through this thread?

I'm very impressed by your efforts, all of you who have taken the time, and I truly appreciate your substantial labors in pulling this thing together. I think it's a great beginning and (for the most part) very well presented. For what it's worth, I do have a couple of criticisms. Take em or leave em, but I think they're pretty valid:

1) I would steer clear of opining on the relative merits of entheogens vs. alcohol. Clearly alcohol kills and damages far more people than psychedelics (and I think this is easily corroborated by hard statistical data, which you could certainly cite to make your point), but calling entheogens "less disgusting than alcohol" is subjective and inappropriate.

2) I would liked to have seen at least some kind of mention of alternate means of inner exploration, i.e. yoga, meditation, religion, etc. I know this is a specific how-to guide for the use of psychedelics, but I think you should be careful not to appear as proselytizing. There is more than one way to access divinity (and isn't that what we tend to think of as at least one of the aims of working with entheogens?), and the path is a highly personal one. Proselytizing just undermines the message (in my opinion - and again, you can take it or leave it...), and I think you're close to the edge.

3) Giving medical advice regarding the use of anti-depressants - BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD. That really just needs to go completely. I'm assuming no one who worked on this is a licensed MD. If not, DON'T GIVE MEDICAL ADVICE. It's dangerous and bad for the community.

4) You have presented the experience (and entity contact, specifically) as objective physical reality - and the truth is that none of us know for a fact what the actual nature of hyperspace really is. I think you've imposed your own interpretations too heavily in this regard, and as a result, it fails (in those spots where you have) to read as a balanced and objective piece.

Anyway, I hope that isn't too much negativity for you. I really think for the most part it's great - just needs a little fine tuning.

I would have to agree with those points as well. We also need to be careful not to include too much of our personal emotions regarding the topic as we dont want it to read like a plea for change but more as a catalyst for change through knowledge.



agreed but I would argue that the truth of the visions is a non issue. There is always something that can be learned by altering your state of mind. Although I do think it would be important the specifically mention that we do not know at this time.

Uncle Knucles THANK YOU for your fine points! Healthy negativity is exactly what we need.


1) Yep, I’ll cite the sources; they’re just always a pain in the ass. They’ll be there for version 0.90. I’ll change the anti-alcohol tone no problem! I now see how negative it is, which wasn’t the intention (I’m fine with alcohol and partake often). Is it acceptable to at least use alcohol as comparison between legal and illegal “drugs?” I think it’s a very important distinction, as highlighted in this article: http://www.beldrug.org/h...cetArticleandComment.pdf


2) Proselytizing? I need more details on this! Let us know where we need to sober up. No need to convert, and making the reader roll his eyes will help nothing. But Spice is a very very spiritual substance. It’s very hard, if not impossible to have that tone not leak through. (And understand I am an atheist--I just think all the “old definitions” are changing)


3) I agree we need to be absurdly careful will anti-depressants. But I think we can’t go posting these amazingly seductive stories while NOT warning folks of the dangers. What part of the warning might stay? and how would you re-word it?
Agreed: I’ve already removed the “we recommend exercise” part.


4) This is indeed controversial, but the evidence is there. I know this doesn’t reflect the attitude of the whole community (and I’m sorry). But this topic is responded to heavily in the bigger, several hundred page eBook. I promise, I DO want an honest pamphlet. The arguments laying out the Objective Hypothesis is going to be 30 pages long--as obviously there is A LOT of ground to cover. I’ll PM you when it’s done in a few weeks.
It’s a question of argument-detail-level... and we ought to highlight this more. What areas need it most?


Keep ‘em coming and THANKS!

I don't think there is anything wrong with making comparisons to legal or illegal drugs (alcohol included). I just think you should be careful not to make judgements or assign a chemical heirarchy with psychedelics at the top.

By proselytizing, I mean that it comes across (and just a bit - not to any kind of militant degree) that you are offering this as THE key to accessing divinity. It's my personal bugaboo, I guess - I just think you could offer up a few alternatives and concede the point that there are many paths to enlightenment. The point is to access previously unconsidered points of view - to expand your mind, as it were. Psychedelics are certainly a fast track method, but I don't think they should be presented as the only way to get there.

Mentioning the possible dangers of mixing anti-depressants with MAOIs is definitely always appropriate. My only objection was to the offering up of opinions about the efficacy of anti-depressants in general. You don't want some impressionable youngster reading your work and deciding to kick their meds based on anything you've written here. The consequences could be ugly - and though I trust your intentions to be totally honest, I just think it's ill advised.

Finally, I'm not trying to debate whether or not the experience is actually real. I don't have a clue what it is - but I generally try to steer clear of making declarative statements about its nature - and I'm not trying to write a definitive text on the subject. It's important, I think, if your aim is to write a treatise to be taken seriously, that you not go on record too much at length about how to be a good ambassador to hyperspatial beings, for example. To the unititiated, you're going to lose all credibility once they reach that page. I think it might be better presented that this is a common experience to DMT travelers (myself included, no doubt), than to lay it out as matter of factly as you have.

I'd suggest taking Art's advice to heart.

These are very wise words.

Nice work team! An excellent start indeed.

Just a couple of things from me, after a quick scan (will read in depth when I'm more awake):
1. It's stated that raw cacao is an MAOI, but it's not. It shouldn't be mixed with MAOI's, but it's not an MAOI it self.
2. The comment that the popping and fizzing in your head afterward is our mind physically adjusting to the changes (paraphrased). This is very speculative. If we are going to speculate anywhere in the book I think it's important to state that it's only a theory.

Accuracy of content is so very key in my opinion, because as soon as people start seeing false statements, or misrepresented statements, they will toss it away as gobbly goop.

Still, great stuff all around. I can't wait to read it from start to finish!

Peace,
-idt

Great material that is beautifully written. I love every word of its articulate style and your message speaks directly to me. Your book is magic. It's how the Bible should have made me feel but didn't.

Thanks guys!!! hahaha, joebono, you give us too much credit!



I've updated the minibook from your comments to version 0.86 as best i could! All major changes are in orange.


Let me know what you think.



a

Great job Acolyte! I'm on the fence between you and Art re:speaking to the reality of hyperspace. For all versions of reality I accept, hyperspace meets the definition. However, many ascribe to a different ontology, and may get confused on this issue. Really awesome read and I can't wait until it's ready to distribute!

pg 4: "are grateful for the," <- think you mean that to be "them".

Excellent revision, Acolyte. I especially enjoyed the "transplanting" analogy. Only thing that needs editing (from my one read-through) is on page 6, you say "Now don't get us wrong, alcohol is still a great time." I get your point - there are good things about alcohol (such as a tasty dank dark beer straight from the tap in the pub) - but this needs rephrasing. How about something like, "Now don't get us wrong, alcohol can be used in a healthy and responsible way."? Also for the book will it still be handy for me to right on the history of psychedelics as antidepressant treatments? I'm more comfortable doing that than writing about current pharmaceutical antidepressants, though I have strong views on those as well. PM me if you will. Cheers.

There is no evidence to support that there is a hyperspace outside of people’s subjective experiences while they are under the influence of a powerful hallucinogenic drug. The same goes for entities. Making statements like this pushes away devout atheist such as myself or other members of the community like burnt. People point to the fact that many people’s hallucinations under the influence of DMT are extremely similar as proof that there is a stable and real hyperspace that cannot be perceived in our normal reality. But let’s look at this from the phenomenological perspective, which is my preferred philosophical school of thought for explaining how we interact and interpret the world. If our brains are just tools that are all built in with the same mechanisms for interpreting sensory data, it would naturally follow that our brains would react in an identical manner when exposed to DMT. There are small discrepancies, but everyone’s subjective conscious differs and there is no telling if a person was born with defective “hardware” so to speak.

I have such a problem with statements such as “These entheogens access a real and independent hyperspace” and “We are not alone. This hyperspace is populated with entities… and they want to say hello” that I don’t know if I could move forward and contribute to CEL. If this is the foundation the CEL is built upon, it would violate my ethical principles as a devout atheist to contribute to CEL. Maybe CEL needs a diametrical atheistic perspective, but I feel this would likely cause a schism in the community and be counter-productive to end goal of the community. Maybe I am somehow misunderstanding what you are trying to say, but when I read those statements it seems pretty clear. Until this is changed or somehow clarified I cannot contribute to CEL. I am sorry and wish you luck in your pursuit of liberty, but I’ll have to pursue my liberty by different means.

Haven't gotten around to reading it, yet, but I'd have to concur strongly, here. Not only for the well-stated points above, but for the simple fact that it will marginalize the whole effort more than the current stigmas against these substances already have. Art's criticisms seem rather poignant , as well.